Contents

The problem with being a bureaucrat

If a bureaucrat edits only occasionally, they become sort of the wise man on top of the mountain who advises the pilgrims and occasionally descends to set right what has gone wrong. But bureaucrats are supposed to be responsible for their wikis - especially on such an active wiki as this one.

If a bureaucrat edits every day, he becomes the hardass busybody cop that everyone hates, and his presence can become counterproductive. Especially when it comes to enforcing important but unpopular policies.

If you're looking at this page there's a good chance it's because I've warned you to follow the image policy.

The image policy is not hard to understand. Read the directions. Follow the directions. I cannot help you if you don't understand after reading the directions, because they are so incredibly simple that I haven't any idea how to help someone who doesn't understand them. There is no rule saying you have to be allowed to upload images and there are plenty of users who can do it right.

Back in the pre-Wikia New Look days, images weren't much of a problem. But now that wikis show the user who uploaded the image alongside the image, and that wikis which allow badges award them for uploading large amounts of images, most Wikia wikis are chock full of duplicate, low quality and/or irrelevant images. That's why the image policy has to be harsh and why I'm unsympathetic to users having trouble with it - because the constant influx of bad and useless images means that strict administration is necessary.

On the subject of myths

To explain the "nuance" of the position this wiki takes on myths related content.

It isn't that discussion of myths itself is offensive or too far off topic. The problem is that myth related articles tend to be almost completely uncontrollable. First, for whatever reason, they're major vandalism magnets. Second, even if the vandalism is kept ahead of, they tend to fill up with speculation, useless details, and information that isn't just wrong, but "stupid-wrong", e.g. the guy who was convinced that Bigfoot was on the doors of the police cars in GTAV, and that that proved he existed in GTA:SA. Lastly it tends to attract editors who are interested in proving myths rather than editing about them neutrally. They fill up the myth articles with ruminations, personal stories, incorrect information, and modded images masquerading as "proof". If this were Wikipedia, you could call them Single Purpose Accounts and POV-Pushers editing with a Conflict Of Interest. When thwarted, they regularly go full vandal, forcing staff to block and clean up after them.

It is better all around to have an entirely separate Myths wiki, with rules and policies specifically tailored to people who want to write about myths, and simply forbid editing about myths and direct interested editors elsewhere on this wiki.

Why didn't you like the GTA4 era games?

The setting was so grim and bleak and miserable I found myself unable to enjoy exploring it

The major characters were void of either sympathetic personality traits or motivations

The sluggish unresponsive driving mechanics

Awful radio station selection. Three rap, no metal, and rock spread across 2 stations and mixed in with other stuff?